It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Governor plans to completely eliminate welfare for families

page: 9
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in


posted on May, 24 2009 @ 10:13 AM
reply to post by whatukno

I agree! It does need an overhaul. I also think if you have any kind of criminal background you should not be allowed assistance. I also think they should be given drug tests as well. If you can buy drugs you can buy everything else you need!
As far as disability I hear ya on that one too. I was in my Dr's office recently and I was talking to a girl in there who was bi-polar like me, and she said she gets disability! I almost fell over. I asked her why?! She said it was easier and that she couldnt keep a job. I couldnt believe someone can get disability for being bi-polar. I am bi-polar and my meds(lithium) help greatly. I am not going to not work just so it's easier! It really floored me that she just thought it was no big deal.. She told me I should do it, and my response was that I dont abuse the system like that and that I believe it's for those who truly need it. She said she has been on assistance for 5 years! That IMO is pure abuse of disability assistance.

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 10:15 AM
reply to post by Hastobemoretolife

I highly agree with your post it's only this is the one part that got to me:

but the small vocal minority voted for "change" with out asking what kind of change it was, and now we are all going to have to pay for it.

The citizens vote doesn't matter in the first place with the Electoral College getting in the way with they're "contributions", which are only leveraged to persuade them in the favor of the Candidate who's paying them off.


posted on May, 24 2009 @ 10:41 AM

Originally posted by spaznational

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

eliminate the state’s welfare program for families, medical insurance for low-income children and Cal Grants cash assistance to college and university students.

There are MANY families which ARE WORKING yet they are still below the poverty line. Yes, there are people taking advantage of the system but many families really need this, and so do the older retired people who can't work anymore, or disabled people.

You have to be too naive to claim everyone who needs assistance is taking advantage of the system, when the truth is far from what you are trying to imply.

This also means that students won't be able to get grants. Many students work, and still need grants to be able to pay their student loans, they also want to take this away.

I feel sorry for you, and your ignorance. But keep wallowing in ignorance and keep showing that you don't have even an ounce of humanity, or compassion in you.
[edit on 23-5-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

I want to know how people survived pre-welfare state. Did they just lie around and wait to die, or did they take initiative and perhaps move to other places where jobs were or perhaps take on an entrepreneurial endeavor. Maybe some of them joined the military and sent the money home to the family.

We should remember it was pre-welfare America that produced The Greatest Generation. The Great Society produced no great generations.

You are right however you are talking of a time when people were more self suffeciant. There were more family farms that people new how to live off of. Now I am a southern girl and have a family farm that has been passed down so worse comes top worse I am bunking down on the farm but how many people have land or knowlege of how to live off of it? Times are different.

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 10:47 AM
reply to post by AllinTheMind89

Yes there are many people who abuse the system and good Lord the imigrants aren't helping. It would be good if there was some way to distinguish those that are full of it and those that need it. My point is if there are no jobs then how are people supposed to work? Yea two years ago your argument would have been valid but today everything has changed. Obama was for change and by God we got change.

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:21 AM

Originally posted by BlackOps719
My comments were not directed toward working families and people who are out here struggling. I realize that times are tough and jobs are scare. My sympathies lay solely with those who are out here trying to keep it together and scratch out a living during this mess. I am in fact ONE of those people.

Hi blackops,

I think your missing the mark by some distance but perhaps you could answer some of the questions and investigate some of sources in my commentary?

As you mention above why are you attempting a defense of the very system that wont protect you, it's loyal hard working servant? If it wont even protect you who , other than the financial/other elites, will it 'protect'?

My pointed comments were directed towards the professional welfare hawks, the ones who have been living and suckling off of the government teets for two and three generations long.

Yes, the financial elites who are getting us to pay interest on money we allow them to 'print' when we could do so ourselves. The typical 'welfare' queens ( who are by no means as typical as you suggest) consume very litle of our productivty by comparison but because that's who the media blames so do you. Well done on being had, now get to fight over the few scraps that qualifies as jobs these days.

The ones who have never even KNOWN what it is like to have a job or to work. T

Myth: People on Welfare Become Permanently Dependent on the Support

Fact: Movement off Welfare Rolls Is Frequent

A prevalent welfare myth is that women who received AFDC became permanently dependent on public assistance. Analyses indicate that 56 percent of AFDC support ended within 12 months, 70 percent within 24 months, and almost 85 percent within 4 years ( Source snipped for space). These exit rates clearly contradict the widespread myth that AFDC recipients wanted to remain on public assistance or that welfare dependency was permanent. Unfortunately, return rates were also high, with 45 percent of ex-recipients returning to AFDC within 1 year. Persons who were likely to use AFDC longer than the average time had less than 12 years of education, no recent work experience, were never married, had a child below age 3 or had three or more children, were Latina or African American, and were under age 24 (space ). These risk factors illustrate the importance of structural barriers, such as inadequate child care, racism, and lack of education.

here are people who have been exploiting our systems and fail safes for decades, having baby after unplanned baby,

Myth: Welfare Encourages Out-of- Wedlock Births and Large Families

Fact: The Average Welfare Family Is No Bigger Than the Average Nonwelfare Family

The belief that single women are promiscuous and have large families to receive increased benefits has no basis in extant research, and single-parent families are not only a phenomenon of the poor (McFate, 1995). In fact, the average family size of welfare recipients has decreased from four in 1969 to 2.8 in 1994 (Staff of House Committee on Ways and Means, 1996). In 1994, 43 percent of welfare families consisted of one child, and 30 percent consisted of two children. Thus, the average welfare family is no larger than the average nonrecipient's family, and despite considerable public concern that welfare encourages out-of-wedlock births, a growing body of empirical evidence indicates that welfare benefits are not a significant incentive for childbearing (Wilcox, Robbennolt, O'Keeffe, & Pynchon, 1997).


As for exploiting 'the system':

Myth: A Huge Chunk of My Tax Dollars Supports Welfare Recipients

Fact: Welfare Costs 1 Percent of the Federal Budget

Widespread misperception about the extent of welfare exacerbate the problems of poverty. The actual cost of welfare programs-about 1 percent of the federal budget and 2 percent of state budgets (McLaughlin, 1997)-is proportionally less than generally believed. During the 104th Congress, more than 93 percent of the budget reductions in welfare entitlements came from programs for low-income people (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 1996). Ironically, middle-class and wealthy Americans also receive "welfare" in the form of tax deductions for home mortgages, corporate and farm subsidies, capital gains tax limits, Social Security, Medicare, and a multitude of other tax benefits. Yet these types of assistance carry no stigma and are rarely considered "welfare" (Goodgame, 1993). Anti-welfare sentiment appears to be related to attitudes about class and widely shared and socially sanctioned stereotypes about the poor. Racism also fuels negative attitudes toward welfare programs (Quadagno, 1994).


collecting food stamps, welfare checks, WIC, and every other available freeby that our elected degenerates have thrown their way.

What about the money they keep throwing at the Pentagon; wouldn't the 15 or 20 billion the Obama adminstration added to this years pentagon budget really helped out California's proposed cuts? What about the hundreds of billions of dollars handed out the banks? Wouldn't it have helped to give dollars to the very poorest who consistently spend it all on day to day needs such as food? How can you stimilate a economy when you take the cash out of the hands of your consumers by refusing to pay them enough to buy anything?

Well guess what. The tit is now dry.

No, it's not. The pentagon isn't facing cuts and the wars in Iraq continues.

There are no more free tax dollars available to give them.

Well not for them but if it wasn't for the concerted action of our various societies they never would have gotten our assistance trough these aid programs. "We' have not decided to stop paying but the people have complained about wars and paying the bankers before the rest of us.

The American working tax payer is just about tapped. Time to get off of their butts and fend for themselves or STARVE.

The American working tax payer is far from tapped ( they wont stop giving money to the Pentagon/banks) but what will happen is that you , or others who lose their jobs, will see less and less of your money coming back to you in state and federal services. Hopefully , since i don't wish it on many, you wont personally experience losing your job or had sufficient tax breaks ( welfare for the rich) and the like to get yourself sufficiently educated to stay employed.

Sorry, but I have no sympathy or remorse for a segment of society who has done nothing but acted as a parasite for year after year and may now find themselves cut off.

Neither have i but we do disagree as to what section of society that is. Frankly your lack of sympathy for those worse off than you ( of whom few are turn into true 'welfare queens , and then mostly trough the cynacisms that comes from first hand knowledge of this terrible system) is probably taunting whatever form ( if any) of Karma that may be coming or going around. I hope you will show this same fortitude of mind when your out of a job; you will need.


posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:22 AM

This is what they call go time. Get up and find a way to provide for yourselves or starve. And I for one think it is a welcomed event.

Because as we can all see after the dust settle's and a few people have starved somalia and sudan turned into really prosperous nations..... I just find it startling that people still think that the government thought up these social welfare programs when we had to fight them tooth and nail to erect these safety nets. The more moderate capitalist ( call them the democratic party if you like; that's sort of fair) thought it might not be the worse compromise as starvation and massive pandemics not only disrupts business but makes it really hard to convince anyone that 'the system' is in fact working in the 'self regulating' way that they keep telling us about.

They never seem to mention the fact that we had threaten them at gunpoint the last time the US public gained massive concessions. Well to be honest it was German guns in the last great battle; you can't have labor disputes and walkouts when your trying to defend your particular brand of capitalism so they compromised and we have been fighting a rearguard action ( and losing many of them) ever since trying to protect the 'rights' they were forced to concede then.

To the college kid who loses funding I sympathize, to the disabled person confined at home who needs assistance to get by I humbly hope you get what is needed,

How? How are they supposed to get help if the social assistance get slashed? 'Smart' food packages and wheelchairs dropped by parachute, from B-52's and Spirit bombers that glides in your window? Why not stop the war, dismantle all the useless overseas bases that sucks up money by the boatload and concentrate ( if you insist) on a much stronger continental USAF/USN so we can deliver the food and wheelchairs by car and or truck?

but for the lazy welfare grubbing garbage out there I say good riddance. I hope you have survival skills.

If we can clean the system out from top down ( starting with all the leaches who sit in air conditioned offices discussing how to propagandize Americans into turning on each other when money becomes scarce) there wont only be a job for everyone with pride enough to want a job ( and i think that is practically everyone) but funds left over so we can drown the true 'welfare' queens in so much money that they they wouldn't have to work and can stay home to raise their children to the best of their abilities thus giving us a much fairer chance of creating a even more responsible and self respecting generation than we have created thus far.

Cutting people off at knees does not (it's been tried) and can not work for the obvious reasons that when members of the community suffers ( and it's almost always women and children) others uses up their own sometimes sparse funds thus drawing down the communities savings and by extension the community is then more vulnerable to future crisis or a run-away effect where there is eventually no one with the resources to help even themselves. Then you get Sudan&Somalia and the women and the children starves and dies first.

Strangely the fact that very few in the US actually starves outright ( althought many tens of millions have their lives shortened by malnourishment) is seen as evidence that corporate capitalism works when it is in fact just proves how capitalist can regulate the system so 'efficiently' that few of their wage slaves starves. That is after all just bad for business when you wish to 'export' (failing all else, by means of B-52's and Spirit bombers ) your economic model to foreigners who would rather try their own systems.

But that's enough talk from me for now and i hope to hear what you have to say in response.


posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:26 AM
Pardon if a Re-Post...

Is California in Need of a Bailout?
May 24, 2009

According to the LA Times, Governor Schwarzenegger has proposed eliminating all State Welfare Programs in California. If true, the long-inevitable CA budget crisis may be starting. Citizens don't want higher taxes, politicians don't want to cut programs. We appear to be headed for more state bailouts, or social unrest as state-provided services fail.

I don't envy the Governator here. While he did preside over a 40% increase in CA's budget, all the blame does not rest with him. California's economy has been a ticking time bomb for a while. Here is the meat from a breaking article on the LA Times' website:

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is proposing to completely eliminate the state’s welfare program for families, medical insurance for low-income children and Cal Grants cash assistance to college and university students.
More at Link...

[edit on 5/24/2009 by Hx3_1963]

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:28 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:41 AM
reply to post by simpleaser

Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life

OMG...I'm still laughing

So what's that quote from...The official NWO/Bilderberg "How to win friends and take over the World" Playbook???

Classic...Chapter 3 Paragraph 5a

Expert who helped New York City avoid bankruptcy in 1975 has some advice for California
Felix Rohatyn says the key is gutsy political leadership and a realistic plan that includes sacrifices by everybody.

Editorial: California's next chapter may be Chap. 11
Bankruptcy would give California a chance to get its fiscal house in order.

[edit on 5/24/2009 by Hx3_1963]

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 12:30 PM
reply to post by StellarX

Suburb, StellarX, Simply Superb! Your's is one of the only posts I've ever "Starred", and it is well deserved.

Thank you for posting the truths that have, for so long, "Denied the Ignorance" of those promoting the prevelence of the "Welfare Queen" stereotype, as just so much cultural proganda.

To my fellow Californians, perhaps it is time that we consider tearing down those seemingly endless subdivisions of empty "Mac-Mansions", build reasonable, affordable, and sustainable housing for all our citizens, and return to productive farm-land all the freed-up housing tracts bought and left to rot by the developers and speculators that help foist this economic disaster upon us.

P.S.: New Rule. If you are here without the proper documentation (ie.: illegaly), your housing, medical, and other family social needs are the financial responsibility of your employer/sponsor, until such time as you provide the proper documentation or become a legal citizen.

For too long, those willing to shirk the law by hiring so-called "illegals" have reaped the benefits of their employees' cheap labor while contributing little or nothing to their welfare.

By paying thier employees under the table to avoid Unemployment Insurance (forcing unemplyed workers onto the welfare rolls instead of the UI lines), State Disability Insurance (SDI)(adding to the uninsured crowds in our over-extended E/R's) and other worker benfits, these leeches have been padding thier pockets at our tax espense.

Now it's time to "Let He Who Benefits Bear the Burden".

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 12:33 PM

My pointed comments were directed towards the professional welfare hawks, the ones who have been living and suckling off of the government teets for two and three generations long.

I am from former Yugoslavia and I can tell you, this is exactly the kind of people which were used as a recruiting base for all criminal activities during the dirtiest war ever. And this is how the system produces these totally immoral and scruples people, who will kill and loot without a second thought. The government keeps track of these people's activity and can nail them and blackmail them to do the dirty job any time they want.

The real intention behind this kind of welfare program is this. So, beware!

And one more thing, about legalizing marijuana and taxing it to fill the holes in Californian budget. Remember Lebanon and Beka valley? That's why there was and still is war and strife in Lebanon. And in Afghanistan, the same thing going on, as well as in Mexico. So, if they do legalize it, you will have a permanent war in California, I have no doubt about it.

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 12:41 PM
The problem with California is that the citizens want social programs but don't want tax increases to pay for them. It's crazy, really. And the Californians voted against all the tax increases that would keep the social programs afloat thru the crisis.

Arnold really has nothing to do with it. Their state gives the governor and legislature no power. The state constitiution gives the people the direct power, so they voted for all these programs and no way to pay for them.

That is the crux of the problem.

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 12:48 PM
The Governoator has a very hard decision on his hands right now. California is bankrupt and he is responsible for fixing it.

Stopping peoples government aid is not a popular decision, but it is a necessity in these hard times.

I actually commend Arnold Schwarzenegger for his role in fixing this predicament California is in.

He is a good leader.

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 12:59 PM

Originally posted by wiredamerican
The Governoator has a very hard decision on his hands right now. California is bankrupt and he is responsible for fixing it.

Stopping peoples government aid is not a popular decision, but it is a necessity in these hard times.

I actually commend Arnold Schwarzenegger for his role in fixing this predicament California is in.

He is a good leader.

I think that he is too good to be a politician. A good man in the wrong place. Despite his perseverance in whatever he accomplished, this game is too big for him to affect it his way.

Now, California may have been a dream land, but is it still?
Too many people expected to get CinemaScope dreams the easy way...

"Time for shower.
It helps..." (Bruce Willis, from Sin City

[edit on 24-5-2009 by DangerDeath]

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 01:04 PM
The amount of stereotypes thrown around in this thread really shocks me for a group as informed at ats! Many have made valid points about the myths of the welfare mothers so there is no need to further comment on that.

What I find so amusing is the comments regarding these people packing up and moving on.
Oh, so where are these people going to get the money to purchase bus or train tickets...most people I know on welfare can't afford cars! Lets see, that would be tickets for mom and the kids. They will need food for the journey, enough cash to find housing, and what about their possessions...oh of course these "welfare" folks can afford storage for their furniture and clothing. NO wait....maybe Greyhound or Amtrack has a nice cheap compartment for all their things.

Really people, if you knew how TOTALLY ignorant that sounds you would be embarrassed. Most people on assistance want to get out of bad neighborhoods but can't afford to....and now you say they should pack up and get out of state.

I thought the motto here was DENY IGNORANCE.

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 01:09 PM
alright, you guys. settle down. first of all, they cant cant take away something that over 800,000 people and families depend on...i think you're taking something and really running with it.

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 01:33 PM
California isn't going to cut anything. All of this bluster about cutting welfare, education, Police/Fire/EMS yada yada isn't anything but saber-rattling by Sacramento in order to force the's hand into giving it money. California will get this money at our expense and it will be bloated business as usual in that cesspool.

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 01:34 PM
reply to post by Tentickles

1st point: Good, they should get a job and start being a productive part of society. Realistically there are only two types of people in this world. Givers, and takers.

2nd point: Never will happen, due to the democrats using welfare and other social programs to buy votes from poor citizens, which intern keeps them poor, creating generations of bought votes.

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 02:37 PM
reply to post by DangerDeath

I agree with your first paragraph, but your second paragraph is wrong.

The Netherlands and Britain have already de-criminalized, and it it has been shown to be effective, and Western Europe is moving towards that direction.

This is the simplest and best thing to do to not only save tax payer money, but take revenue out of the hand of criminals. Also, as an agricultural product, making canvas and diesel fuel, and cleaning up soil, a whole new industry could be created.

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 03:05 PM

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by DangerDeath

I agree with your first paragraph, but your second paragraph is wrong.

The Netherlands and Britain have already de-criminalized, and it it has been shown to be effective, and Western Europe is moving towards that direction.

This is the simplest and best thing to do to not only save tax payer money, but take revenue out of the hand of criminals. Also, as an agricultural product, making canvas and diesel fuel, and cleaning up soil, a whole new industry could be created.

I was not talking about marijuana being free to purchase. I'm talking about planting it and controlling it's harvest, the monopoly. That's what wars are always about. California is a place where you can grow cannabis. And California is a big place. And now when big fires have destroyed lots of shrub, there is lots of land clearly prepared for this purpose. Lets see if someone hurries to grab it

new topics

top topics

<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in